New initiation of opioids, benzodiazepines and antipsychotics following hospitalization for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Patients newly initiated on opioids (OP), benzodiazepines (BZD), and antipsychotics (AP) during hospitalization are often prescribed these on discharge. Implications of this practice on outcomes remains unexplored. OBJECTIVE: To explore the prevalence and risk factors of new initiation of select OP, BZD and AP among patients requiring in-patient stays. Test the hypothesis that new prescriptions are associated with higher odds of readmission or death within 28 days of discharge. DESIGN: Single center retrospective cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients admitted to a tertiary-level medical center with either a primary diagnosis of RT-PCR positive for COVID-19 or high index of clinical suspicion thereof. INTERVENTION: None. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: Exposure was the new initiation of select common OP, BZD, and AP which were continued on hospital discharge. Outcome was a composite of 28-day readmission or death following index admission. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess patient mortality or readmission within 28 days of discharge associated with new prescriptions at discharge. RESULTS: One thousand three hundred and nineteen patients were included in the analysis. 11.3% (149/1319) were discharged with a new prescription of select OP, BZD, or AP either alone or in combination. OP (110/149) were most prescribed followed by BZD (41/149) and AP (22/149). After adjusting for unbalanced confounders, new prescriptions (adjusted odds ratio: 2.44, 95% confidence interval: 1.42-4.12; p = .001) were associated with readmission or death within 28 days of discharge. One in nine patients admitted with a diagnosis of COVID-19 or high clinical suspicion thereof were discharged with a new prescription of either OP, BZD or AP. New prescriptions were associated with higher odds of 28-day readmission or death. Strengthening medication reconciliation processes focused on these classes may reduce avoidable harm.

Variation in Sedative and Analgesic Use During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Associated Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Providing analgesia and sedation is an essential component of caring for many mechanically ventilated patients. The selection of analgesic and sedative medications during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the impact of these sedation practices on patient outcomes, remain incompletely characterized. RESEARCH QUESTION: What were the hospital patterns of analgesic and sedative use for patients with COVID-19 who received mechanical ventilation (MV), and what differences in clinical patient outcomes were observed across prevailing sedation practices? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study of hospitalized adults who received MV for COVID-19 from February 2020 through April 2021 within the Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study (VIRUS) COVID-19 Registry. To describe common sedation practices, we used hierarchical clustering to group hospitals based on the percentage of patients who received various analgesic and sedative medications. We then used multivariable regression models to evaluate the association between hospital analgesia and sedation cluster and duration of MV (with a placement of death [POD] approach to account for competing risks). RESULTS: We identified 1,313 adults across 35 hospitals admitted with COVID-19 who received MV. Two clusters of analgesia and sedation practices were identified. Cluster 1 hospitals generally administered opioids and propofol with occasional use of additional sedatives (eg, benzodiazepines, alpha-agonists, and ketamine); cluster 2 hospitals predominantly used opioids and benzodiazepines without other sedatives. As compared with patients in cluster 2, patients admitted to cluster 1 hospitals underwent a shorter adjusted median duration of MV with POD (ß-estimate, -5.9; 95% CI, -11.2 to -0.6; P = .03). INTERPRETATION: Patients who received MV for COVID-19 in hospitals that prioritized opioids and propofol for analgesia and sedation experienced shorter adjusted median duration of MV with POD as compared with patients who received MV in hospitals that primarily used opioids and benzodiazepines.

Respiratory drive heterogeneity associated with systemic inflammation and vascular permeability in acute respiratory distress syndrome.

BACKGROUND: In acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), respiratory drive often differs among patients with similar clinical characteristics. Readily observable factors like acid-base state, oxygenation, mechanics, and sedation depth do not fully explain drive heterogeneity. This study evaluated the relationship of systemic inflammation and vascular permeability markers with respiratory drive and clinical outcomes in ARDS. METHODS: ARDS patients enrolled in the multicenter EPVent-2 trial with requisite data and plasma biomarkers were included. Neuromuscular blockade recipients were excluded. Respiratory drive was measured as PES0.1, the change in esophageal pressure during the first 0.1 s of inspiratory effort. Plasma angiopoietin-2, interleukin-6, and interleukin-8 were measured concomitantly, and 60-day clinical outcomes evaluated. RESULTS: 54.8% of 124 included patients had detectable respiratory drive (PES0.1 range of 0-5.1 cm H2O). Angiopoietin-2 and interleukin-8, but not interleukin-6, were associated with respiratory drive independently of acid-base, oxygenation, respiratory mechanics, and sedation depth. Sedation depth was not significantly associated with PES0.1 in an unadjusted model, or after adjusting for mechanics and chemoreceptor input. However, upon adding angiopoietin-2, interleukin-6, or interleukin-8 to models, lighter sedation was significantly associated with higher PES0.1. Risk of death was less with moderate drive (PES0.1 of 0.5-2.9 cm H2O) compared to either lower drive (hazard ratio 1.58, 95% CI 0.82-3.05) or higher drive (2.63, 95% CI 1.21-5.70) (p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with ARDS, systemic inflammatory and vascular permeability markers were independently associated with higher respiratory drive. The heterogeneous response of respiratory drive to varying sedation depth may be explained in part by differences in inflammation and vascular permeability.

Prescription of potentially inappropriate medications after an intensive care unit stay for acute respiratory failure.

BACKGROUND: Among survivors of critical illness, prescription of potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) at hospital discharge is thought to be an important, modifiable patient safety concern. To date, there are little empirical data evaluating this issue. RESEARCH QUESTION: The objective of this study was to determine the frequency of PIM prescribed to survivors of acute respiratory failure (ARF) at hospital discharge and explore their association with readmissions or death within 90 days of hospital discharge. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Prospective multicenter cohort study of ARF survivors admitted to ICUs and discharged home. Prospective of new PIMs with a high-adverse-effect profile ("high impact") at discharge was the primary exposure. Potential inappropriateness was determined by a structured consensus process using Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions-Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment, Beers' criteria, and clinical context of prescriptions by a multidisciplinary team. Covariate balancing propensity score was used for the primary analysis. RESULTS: Of the 195 Addressing Post Intensive Care Syndrome-01 (APICS-01) patients, 169 (87%) had ≥1 new medications prescribed at discharge, with 154 (91.1%) prescribed with one or more high-impact (HI) medications. Patients were prescribed a median of 5 [3-7] medications, of which 3 [1-4] were HI. Twenty percent of HI medications were potentially inappropriate. Medications with significant central nervous system side-effects were most prescribed potentially inappropriately. Forty-six (30%) patients experienced readmission or death within 90 days of hospital discharge. After adjusting for prespecified covariates, the association between prescription of potentially inappropriate HI medications and the composite primary outcome did not meet the prespecified threshold for statistical significance (risk ratio: 0.54; 0.26-1.13; p = 0.095) or with the constituent endpoints: readmission (risk ratio: 0.57, 0.27-1.11) or death (0.7, 0.05-9.32). CONCLUSION: At hospital discharge, most ARF survivors are prescribed medications with a high-adverse-effect profile and approximately one-fifth are potentially inappropriate. Although prescription of such medications was not associated with 90-day readmissions and mortality, these results highlight an area for additional investigation.

Postoperative virtual reality for recovery after bariatric surgery: study protocol for a randomised clinical trial.

Background: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols for bariatric surgery improve clinical outcomes. However, the impact of ERAS protocols on patient satisfaction is unknown. Virtual reality has been implemented as an effective adjunct to standard analgesic regimens. This study seeks to find out if immersive virtual reality in the immediate postoperative period could improve the subjective quality of recovery and further reduce opioid requirements for bariatric surgery patients compared with ERAS care alone. Methods: This is a single-centre, randomised clinical trial of patients recovering from laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Once in the post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU), participants will receive either an immersive virtual reality plus ERAS protocol or ERAS protocol alone. The primary outcome will be the Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) score at PACU discharge. Secondary outcomes include PACU opioid requirements, length of PACU stay, PACU pain scores, QoR-15 score on postoperative day 1, hospital length of stay, opioid requirements, and opioid-related adverse effects until hospital discharge. Conclusions: Positive findings from this study could introduce virtual reality as a non-pharmacological adjunct during PACU care that improves subjective recovery for patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Clinical trial registration: NCT04754165.

Early empiric antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients: results from the international VIRUS registry.

OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 escalated inappropriate antibiotic use. We determined the distribution of pathogens causing community-acquired co-infections, the rate, and factors associated with early empiric antibiotic (EEAB) treatment among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS: The Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study (VIRUS) COVID-19 Registry including 68,428 patients from 28 countries enrolled between January 2020 and October 2021 were screened. After exclusions, 7830 patients were included in the analysis. Azithromycin and/or other antibiotic treatment given within the first 3 days of hospitalization was investigated. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine factors associated with EEAB use. RESULTS: The majority (6214, 79.4%) of patients received EEAB, with azithromycin combination being the most frequent (3146, 40.2%). As the pandemic advanced, the proportion of patients receiving EEAB regressed from 84.4% (786/931) in January-March 2020 to 65.2% (30/46) in April-June 2021 (P < 0.001). Beta-lactams, especially ceftriaxone was the most commonly used antibiotic. Staphylococcus aureus was the most commonly isolated pathogen. Multivariate analysis showed geographical location and pandemic timeline as the strongest independent predictors of EEAB use. CONCLUSIONS: EEAB administration decreased as pandemic advanced, which may be the result of intensified antimicrobial stewardship efforts. Our study provides worldwide goals for antimicrobial stewardship programs in the post-COVID-19 era.

Inflammatory subphenotypes in patients at risk of ARDS: evidence from the LIPS-A trial.

PURPOSE: Latent class analysis (LCA) has identified hyper- and non-hyper-inflammatory subphenotypes in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). It is unknown how early inflammatory subphenotypes can be identified in patients at risk of ARDS. We aimed to test for inflammatory subphenotypes upon presentation to the emergency department. METHODS: LIPS-A was a trial of aspirin to prevent ARDS in at-risk patients presenting to the emergency department. In this secondary analysis, we performed LCA using clinical, blood test, and biomarker variables. RESULTS: Among 376 (96.4%) patients from the LIPS-A trial, two classes were identified upon presentation to the emergency department (day 0): 72 (19.1%) patients demonstrated characteristics of a hyper-inflammatory and 304 (80.9%) of a non-hyper-inflammatory subphenotype. 15.3% of patients in the hyper- and 8.2% in the non-hyper-inflammatory class developed ARDS (p = 0.07). Patients in the hyper-inflammatory class had fewer ventilator-free days (median [interquartile range, IQR] 28[23-28] versus 28[27-28]; p = 0.010), longer intensive care unit (3[2-6] versus 0[0-3] days; p < 0.001) and hospital (9[6-18] versus 5[3-9] days; p < 0.001) length of stay, and higher 1-year mortality (34.7% versus 20%; p = 0.008). Subphenotypes were identified on day 1 and 4 in a subgroup with available data (n = 244). 77.9% of patients remained in their baseline class throughout day 4. Patients with a hyper-inflammatory subphenotype throughout the study period (n = 22) were at higher risk of ARDS (36.4% versus 10.4%; p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Hyper- and non-hyper-inflammatory subphenotypes may precede ARDS development, remain identifiable over time, and can be identified upon presentation to the emergency department. A hyper-inflammatory subphenotype predicts worse outcomes.

DANGER Signals Activate G -Protein Receptor Kinases Suppressing Neutrophil Function and Predisposing to Infection After Tissue Trauma.

OBJECTIVE: Injured tissue predisposes the subject to local and systemic infection. We studied injury-induced immune dysfunction seeking novel means to reverse such predisposition. BACKGROUND: Injury mobilizes primitive "DANGER signals" [danger-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs)] activating innate immunocyte (neutrophils, PMN) signaling and function. Mitochondrial formyl peptides activate G -protein coupled receptors (GPCR) like formyl peptide receptor-1. Mitochondrial DNA and heme activate toll-like receptors (TLR9 and TLR2/4). GPCR kinases (GRKs) can regulate GPCR activation. METHODS: We studied human and mouse PMN signaling elicited by mitochondrial DAMPs (GPCR surface expression; protein phosphorylation, or acetylation; Ca 2+ flux) and antimicrobial functions [cytoskeletal reorganization, chemotaxis (CTX), phagocytosis, bacterial killing] in cellular systems and clinical injury samples. Predicted rescue therapies were assessed in cell systems and mouse injury-dependent pneumonia models. RESULTS: Mitochondrial formyl peptides activate GRK2, internalizing GPCRs and suppressing CTX. Mitochondrial DNA suppresses CTX, phagocytosis, and killing through TLR9 through a novel noncanonical mechanism that lacks GPCR endocytosis. Heme also activates GRK2. GRK2 inhibitors like paroxetine restore functions. GRK2 activation through TLR9 prevented actin reorganization, implicating histone deacetylases (HDACs). Actin polymerization, CTX, bacterial phagocytosis, and killing were also rescued, therefore, by the HDAC inhibitor valproate. Trauma repository PMN showed GRK2 activation and cortactin deacetylation, which varied with severity and was most marked in patients developing infections. Either GRK2 or HDAC inhibition prevented loss of mouse lung bacterial clearance, but only the combination rescued clearance when given postinjury. CONCLUSIONS: Tissue injury-derived DAMPs suppress antimicrobial immunity through canonical GRK2 activation and a novel TLR-activated GRK2-pathway impairing cytoskeletal organization. Simultaneous GRK2/HDAC inhibition rescues susceptibility to infection after tissue injury.

Discharge Disposition and Loss of Independence Among Survivors of COVID-19 Admitted to Intensive Care: Results From the SCCM Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study (VIRUS).

OBJECTIVES: To describe incidence and risk factors of loss of previous independent living through nonhome discharge or discharge home with health assistance in survivors of intensive care unit (ICU) admission for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). DESIGN: Multicenter observational study including patients admitted to the ICU from January 2020 till June 30, 2021. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that there is a high risk of nonhome discharge in patients surviving ICU admission due to COVID-19. SETTING: Data were included from 306 hospitals in 28 countries participating in the SCCM Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study COVID-19 registry. PATIENTS: Previously independently living adult ICU survivors of COVID-19. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was nonhome discharge. Secondary outcome was the requirement of health assistance among patients who were discharged home. Out of 10 820 patients, 7101 (66%) were discharged alive; 3791 (53%) of these survivors lost their previous independent living status, out of those 2071 (29%) through nonhome discharge, and 1720 (24%) through discharge home requiring health assistance. In adjusted analyses, loss of independence on discharge among survivors was predicted by patient age ≥ 65 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.47-3.14, P < .0001), former and current smoking status (aOR 1.25, 95% CI 1.08-1.46, P = .003 and 1.60 (95% CI 1.18-2.16), P = .003, respectively), substance use disorder (aOR 1.52, 95% CI 1.12-2.06, P = .007), requirement for mechanical ventilation (aOR 4.17, 95% CI 3.69-4.71, P < .0001), prone positioning (aOR 1.19, 95% CI 1.03-1.38, P = .02), and requirement for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (aOR 2.28, 95% CI 1.55-3.34, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: More than half of ICU survivors hospitalized for COVID-19 are unable to return to independent living status, thereby imposing a significant secondary strain on health care systems worldwide.

Outcomes in Patients Perceived as Receiving Excessive Care by ICU Physicians and Nurses: Differences Between Patients < 75 and ≥ 75 Years of Age?

BACKGROUND: The benefit of the ICU for older patients is often debated. There is little knowledge on subjective impressions of excessive care in ICU nurses and physicians combined with objective patient data in real-life cases. RESEARCH QUESTION: Is there a difference in treatment limitation decisions and 1-year outcomes in patients < 75 and ≥ 75 years of age, with and without concordant perceptions of excessive care by two or more ICU nurses and physicians? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a reanalysis of the prospective observational DISPROPRICUS study, performed in 56 ICUs. Nurses and physicians completed a daily questionnaire about the appropriateness of care for each of their patients during a 28-day period in 2014. We compared the cumulative incidence of patients with concordant perceptions of excessive care, treatment limitation decisions, and the proportion of patients attaining the combined end point (death, poor quality of life, or not being at home) at 1 year across age groups via Cox regression with propensity score weighting and Fisher exact tests. RESULTS: Of 1,641 patients, 405 (25%) were ≥ 75 years of age. The cumulative incidence of concordant perceptions of excessive care was higher in older patients (13.6% vs 8.5%; P < .001). In patients with concordant perceptions of excessive care, we found no difference between age groups in risk of death (1-year mortality, 83% in both groups; P > .99; hazard ratio [HR] after weighting, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.74-1.65), treatment limitation decisions (33% vs 31%; HR after weighting, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.69-2.17), and reaching the combined end point at 1 year (90% vs 93%; P = .546). In patients without concordant perceptions of excessive care, we found a difference in risk of death (1-year mortality, 41% vs 30%; P < .001; HR after weighting, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.11-1.73) and treatment limitation decisions (11% vs 5%; P < .001; HR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.37-3.27); however, treatment limitation decisions were mostly documented prior to ICU admission. The risk of reaching the combined end point was higher in the older adults (61.6% vs 52.8%; P < .001). INTERPRETATION: Although the incidence of perceptions of excessive care is slightly higher in older patients, there is no difference in treatment limitation decisions and 1-year outcomes between older and younger patients once patients are identified by concordant perceptions of excessive care. Additionally, in patients without concordant perceptions, the outcomes are worse in the older adults, pleading against ageism in ICU nurses and physicians.

Preoxygenation with standard facemask combining apnoeic oxygenation using high flow nasal cannula versuss standard facemask alone in patients with and without obesity: the OPTIMASK international study.

BACKGROUND: Combining oxygen facemask with apnoeic oxygenation using high-flow-nasal-oxygen (HFNO) for preoxygenation in the operating room has not been studied against standard oxygen facemask alone. We hypothesized that facemask-alone would be associated with lower levels of lowest end-tidal oxygen (EtO2) within 2 min after intubation in comparison with facemask combined with HFNO. METHODS: In an international prospective before-after multicentre study, we included adult patients intubated in the operating room from September 2022 to December 2022. In the before period, preoxygenation was performed with facemask-alone, which was removed during laryngoscopy. In the after period, facemask combined with HFNO was used for preoxygenation and HFNO for apnoeic oxygenation during laryngoscopy. HFNO was maintained throughout intubation. The primary outcome was the lowest EtO2 within 2 min after intubation. The secondary outcome was SpO2 ≤ 95% within 2 min after intubation. Subgroup analyses were performed in patients without and with obesity. This study was registered 10 August 2022 with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT05495841. RESULTS: A total of 450 intubations were evaluated, 233 with facemask-alone and 217 with facemask combined with HFNO. In all patients, the lowest EtO2 within 2 min after intubation was significantly lower with facemask-alone than with facemask combined with HFNO, 89 (85-92)% vs 91 (88-93)%, respectively (mean difference - 2.20(- 3.21 to - 1.18), p < 0.001). In patients with obesity, similar results were found [87(82-91)% vs 90(88-92)%, p = 0.004]; as in patients without obesity [90(86-92)% vs 91(89-93)%, p = 0.001)]. SpO2 ≤ 95% was more frequent with facemask-alone (14/232, 6%) than with facemask combined with HFNO (2/215, 1%, p = 0.004). No severe adverse events were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Combining facemask with HFNO for preoxygenation and apnoeic oxygenation was associated with increased levels of lowest EtO2 within 2 min after intubation and less desaturation.

Prevalence and association of non-medical cannabis use with post-procedural healthcare utilisation in patients undergoing surgery or interventional procedures: a retrospective cohort study.

Background: There is paucity of data regarding prevalence and key harms of non-medical cannabis use in surgical patients. We investigated whether cannabis use in patients undergoing surgery or interventional procedures patients was associated with a higher degree of post-procedural healthcare utilisation. Methods: 210,639 adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery between January 2008 and June 2020 at an academic healthcare network in Massachusetts, USA, were included. The primary exposure was use of cannabis, differentiated by reported ongoing non-medical use, self-identified during structured, preoperative nursing/physician interviews, or diagnosis of cannabis use disorder based on International Classification of Diseases, 9th/10th Revision, diagnostic codes. The main outcome measure was the requirement of advanced post-procedural healthcare utilisation (unplanned intensive care unit admission, hospital re-admission or non-home discharge). Findings: 16,211 patients (7.7%) were identified as cannabis users. The prevalence of cannabis use increased from 4.9% in 2008 to 14.3% by 2020 (p < 0.001). Patients who consumed cannabis had higher rates of psychiatric comorbidities (25.3 versus 16.8%; p < 0.001) and concomitant non-tobacco substance abuse (30.2 versus 7.0%; p < 0.001). Compared to non-users, patients with a diagnosis of cannabis use disorder had higher odds of requiring advanced post-procedural healthcare utilisation after adjusting for patient characteristics, concomitant substance use and socioeconomic factors (aOR [adjusted odds ratio] 1.16; 95% CI 1.02-1.32). By contrast, patients with ongoing non-medical cannabis use had lower odds of advanced post-procedural healthcare utilisation (aOR 0.87; 95% CI 0.81-0.92, compared to non-users). Interpretation: One in seven patients undergoing surgery or interventional procedures in 2020 reported cannabis consumption. Differential effects on post-procedural healthcare utilisation were observed between patients with non-medical cannabis use and cannabis use disorder. Funding: This work was supported by an unrestricted philantropic grant from Jeff and Judy Buzen to Maximilian S. Schaefer.

Health Expectations and Quality of Life After Acute Respiratory Failure: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients often have high expectations for recovery after critical illness, but the impact of these expectations on subsequent quality of life (QoL) after serious illnesses has not been evaluated empirically. RESEARCH QUESTION: Among adult survivors of acute respiratory failure (ARF), are met vs unmet expectations for health associated with self-reported QoL 6 months after discharge? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a prospective longitudinal cohort study enrolling consecutive adult patients with ARF managed in ICUs at five academic medical centers. At hospital discharge, we evaluated participants' expected health 6 months in the future via a visual analog scale (VAS; range, 0-100), with higher scores representing better expected health. At 6-month follow-up, perceived health was assessed using the EQ-5D VAS, and QoL was assessed using the World Health Organization Quality of Life Brief Version (WHOQOL-BREF) instrument. Participants' health expectations were categorized as having been met when perceived health at 6 months was no more than eight points lower than their expectation at study enrollment. The primary analysis compared WHOQOL-BREF domain scores (range, 0-100) at 6 months after discharge in patients with met vs unmet health expectations using the nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test. Secondary analysis modeled WHOQOL-BREF domain scores using multivariate regression, and sensitivity analyses assessed QoL using EQ-5D-5L index values. RESULTS: In the primary analysis, QoL was significantly better among participants with met vs unmet health expectations across all domains of the WHOQOL-BREF: physical health (estimated difference in scores: median, 19 [interquartile range (IQR), 12-15]; P < .001), psychological health (median, 12 [IQR, 6-18]; P < .001), social relationships (median, 6 [IQR, 0-13]; P = .02), and environmental health (median, 12 [IQR, 6-13]; P < .001). In multivariate regression, the difference between expected and perceived health remained associated significantly with the physical health domain score. INTERPRETATION: Fulfillment of health expectations is associated with better QoL after ARF, suggesting a mechanism underpinning successful ICU recovery programs that incorporate normalization and expectation management.

Association Between Unmet Nonmedication Needs After Hospital Discharge and Readmission or Death Among Acute Respiratory Failure Survivors: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize early unmet nonmedication discharge needs (UDNs), classified as durable medical equipment (DME), home health services (HHS), and follow-up medical appointments (FUAs) and explore their association with 90-day readmission and mortality among survivors of acute respiratory failure (ARF) who were discharged home. DESIGN: Prospective multicenter cohort study. SETTING: Six academic medical centers across United States. PARTICIPANTS: Adult survivors of ARF who required an ICU stay and were discharged home from hospital. INTERVENTIONS: None. Exposure of interest was the proportion of UDN for the following categories: DME, HHS, and FUA ascertained within 7-28 days after hospital discharge. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Two hundred eligible patients were recruited between January 2019 and August 2020. One-hundred ninety-five patients were included in the analytic cohort: 118 were prescribed DME, 134 were prescribed HHS, and 189 needed at least one FUA according to discharge plans. 98.4% (192/195) had at least one identified nonmedication need at hospital discharge. Median (interquartile range) proportion of unmet needs across three categories were 0 (0-15%) for DME, 0 (0-50%) for HHS, and 0 (0-25%) for FUA, and overall was 0 (0-20%). Fifty-six patients (29%) had 90-day death or readmission. After adjusting for prespecified covariates, having greater than the median level of unmet needs was not associated with an increased risk of readmission or death within 90 days of discharge (risk ratio, 0.89; 0.51-1.57; p = 0.690). Age, hospital length of stay, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II severity of illness score, and Multidimensional Scale Perceived Social Support score were associated with UDN. CONCLUSIONS: UDN were common among survivors of ARF but not significantly associated a composite outcome of 90-day readmission or death. Our results highlight the substantial magnitude of UDN and identifies areas especially vulnerable to lapses in healthcare coordination.

Neutrophil heterogeneity and emergence of a distinct population of CD11b/CD18-activated low-density neutrophils after trauma.

INTRODUCTION: Multiple large clinical trauma trials have documented an increased susceptibility to infection after injury. Although neutrophils (polymorphonuclear leukocytes [PMNs]) were historically considered a homogeneous cell type, we hypothesized that injury could alter neutrophil heterogeneity and predispose to dysfunction. To explore whether trauma modifies PMN heterogeneity, we performed an observational mass-spectrometry-based cytometry study on total leukocytes and low-density PMNs found in the peripheral blood mononuclear cell fraction of leukocytes from healthy controls and trauma patients. METHODS: A total of 74 samples from 12 trauma patients, each sampled at 1 or more time points, and matched controls were fractionated and profiled by mass-spectrometry-based cytometry using a panel of 44 distinct markers. After deconvolution and conservative gating on neutrophils, data were analyzed using Seurat, followed by clustering of principal components. RESULTS: Eleven distinct neutrophil populations were resolved in control and trauma neutrophils based on differential protein surface marker expression. Trauma markedly altered the basal heterogeneity of neutrophil subgroups seen in the control samples, with loss of a dominant population of resting neutrophils marked by high expression of C3AR and low levels of CD63, CD64, and CD177 (cluster 1), and expansion of two alternative neutrophil populations, one of which is marked by high expression of CD177 with suppression of CD10, CD16, C3AR, CD63, and CD64 (cluster 6). Remarkably, following trauma, a substantially larger percentage of neutrophils sediment in the monocyte fraction. These low-density neutrophils bear markers of functional exhaustion and form a unique trauma-induced population (cluster 9) with markedly upregulated expression of active surface adhesion molecules (activated CD11b/CD18), with suppression of nearly all other surface markers, including receptors for formyl peptides, leukotrienes, chemokines, and complement. CONCLUSION: Circulating neutrophils demonstrate considerable evidence of functional heterogeneity that is markedly altered by trauma. Trauma induces evolution of a novel, exhausted, low-density neutrophil population with immunosuppressive features.

Fulfillment of Patient Expectations after Acute Respiratory Failure: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.

Rationale: Discussion of patient expectations for recovery is a component of intensive care unit (ICU) follow-up clinics. However, few studies have formally evaluated recovery-related expectations of ICU survivors. Objectives: To estimate the prevalence of unmet expectations for recovery 6 months after hospital discharge among adult survivors of acute respiratory failure (ARF). Methods: This was a prospective, longitudinal, cohort study of survivors of ARF discharged to home from five U.S. medical centers. Expectations for functional recovery were assessed by asking which activities and instrumental activities of daily living (I/ADLs) survivors expected to perform independently at 6 months. Survivors' expectations for overall health status were assessed using a visual analogue scale ranging from 0 to 100. At 6-month follow-up, participants reported which I/ADLs they could perform independently and rated their overall health status using a 100-point visual analogue scale. We defined a participant's functional expectations as being met if they reported independently performing I/ADLs as expected at hospital discharge. Health expectations were considered to be met when self-rated health status at 6 months was no more than 8 points lower than expected at enrollment. Results: Among 180 enrollees, 169 (94%) were alive, and 160 of these (95%) participated in 6-month follow-up. Functional expectations were met for 71% of participating survivors, and overall health expectations were met for 50%. Expectations for functional independence were high, ranging from 87% (housekeeping) to 99% (using a telephone). General health expectations were variable (median, 85; interquartile range [IQR], 75-95). At 6-month follow-up, self-rated, overall health ranged from 2 to 100 (median, 80; IQR, 60-85). In exploratory analyses, participants with met versus unmet expectations differed most in formal education (functional expectations standardized difference = 0.88; health expectations standardized difference = 0.41). Conclusions: Expectations of survivors of ARF about independent functioning were high and generally met, but half had unmet general health expectations 6 months after discharge. It is difficult to predict whose health expectations will be unmet, but possessing less formal education may be a risk factor. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03797313).

Pre-hospital Aspirin Use and Patient Outcomes in COVID-19: Results from the International Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study (VIRUS)

Introduction: The goal of this investigation is to assess the association between prehospital use of aspirin (ASA) and patient-centered outcomes in a large global cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients.Methods: This study utilizes data from the Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study (VIRUS) Registry. Adult patients hospitalized from February 15th, 2020, to September 30th, 2021, were included. Multivariable regression analyses were utilized to assess the association between pre-hospital use of ASA and the primary outcome of overall hospital mortality.Results: 21,579 patients were included from 185 hospitals (predominantly US-based, 71.3%), with 4691 (21.7%) receiving pre-hospital ASA. Patients receiving ASA, compared to those without pre-admission ASA use, were generally older (median 70 vs. 59 years), more likely to be male (58.7 vs. 56.0%), caucasian (57.4 vs. 51.6%), and more commonly had higher rates of medical comorbidities. In multivariable analyses, patients receiving pre-hospital ASA had lower mortality (HR: 0.89, 95% CI 0.82–0.97, p=0.01) and reduced hazard for progression to severe disease or death (HR: 0.91, 95% CI 0.84–0.99, p=0.02) and more hospital free days (1.00 days, 95% CI 0.66–1.35, p=0.01) compared to those without pre-hospital ASA use. The overall direction and significance of the results remained the same in sensitivity analysis, after adjusting the multivariable model for time since pandemic.Conclusions: In this large international cohort, pre-hospital use of ASA was associated with a lower hazard for death in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Randomized controlled trials may be warranted to assess the utility of pre-hospital use of ASA. (AU)

Pre-hospital Aspirin Use and Patient Outcomes in COVID-19: Results from the International Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study (VIRUS).

INTRODUCTION: The goal of this investigation is to assess the association between prehospital use of aspirin (ASA) and patient-centered outcomes in a large global cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This study utilizes data from the Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study (VIRUS) Registry. Adult patients hospitalized from February 15th, 2020, to September 30th, 2021, were included. Multivariable regression analyses were utilized to assess the association between pre-hospital use of ASA and the primary outcome of overall hospital mortality. RESULTS: 21,579 patients were included from 185 hospitals (predominantly US-based, 71.3%), with 4691 (21.7%) receiving pre-hospital ASA. Patients receiving ASA, compared to those without pre-admission ASA use, were generally older (median 70 vs. 59 years), more likely to be male (58.7 vs. 56.0%), caucasian (57.4 vs. 51.6%), and more commonly had higher rates of medical comorbidities. In multivariable analyses, patients receiving pre-hospital ASA had lower mortality (HR: 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.97, p=0.01) and reduced hazard for progression to severe disease or death (HR: 0.91, 95% CI 0.84-0.99, p=0.02) and more hospital free days (1.00 days, 95% CI 0.66-1.35, p=0.01) compared to those without pre-hospital ASA use. The overall direction and significance of the results remained the same in sensitivity analysis, after adjusting the multivariable model for time since pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: In this large international cohort, pre-hospital use of ASA was associated with a lower hazard for death in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Randomized controlled trials may be warranted to assess the utility of pre-hospital use of ASA.